Since we've only got a few grainy photos to work off, why not wait for the accident report.





.

Min airspeed for a restart is 140KNOTS THATS ABSOLUTELY MIN AIRSPEED.
Not 108 knots as has been quoted

Please don't respond, Car RAMROD. We agree with what you said. Please don't encourage this individual.

What-ever the power plants and props were doing at the time of impact may very well not reflect what were the power parameters a few seconds before impact. The pilot may very well have rectified an issue to late to save the aircraft. So what we 'see' in those prop marks on the roof may be a false indicator.

An accident investigation report will tell us more.





.

Yep their reply hasn't exactly got much to do with the question I asked. Also, we weren't even talking about restarts in relation to the accident!
I agree, no point in conversing with someone so oblivious but unfortunately there's others out there that read said dribble and I'm somewhat compelled to at least post the correct information- not necessarily in response per se.

I like everyone else wondered why this accident happened. I can clearly see why now with comments like this.

English is not a sign of how smart one is. I feel blessed to have poor English skills. What i loose on that i more than make up in my ability to be able to troubleshoot work out and repair from limited data. Clearly you are afraid of this. For all your eppressions i have given valid reasons for them.
So for all your good English what do you have ? God gave you two ears two eyes one mouth. Maybe you should look listen more look more and speak less.
What makes your argument more right over mine. Mine are from correct data and how it all works together in both flight and in principle and a clear and detaled understanding.

Lets look at engine restart in flight.
Min aspeed of n 140 knots, accident was 108 knos some 32 knots slower. Why is 140 knots important. That equals approximately 12% ng at 140 knots. Thats the min speed to indrouce fuel, with out having a metal contrail.
So say we take 30% off 12%. So now we have 8% ng. Oil px at 8% is going to be at best maybe 10 psi. Now this has to be transmitted to the prop gov. But its not being driven is it. Its powered by tne power section. Even if the prop hasnt stopped spining there is not enough oil flow from the pump to supply the gov to add px to over come the one the prop spring px and the prop counter weights. Take out prop internal leakage as well an what do you have.
Its going to be less than 8% ng. As speed increases so flow and ram px will be increased to a greater sum.

Smart people use all the information at hand and not discard what they dont wish to hear.

All of the contributions on the PT6 internals are making me think! That's a plus as long as I don't get it screwed up.

Connedrod,
If you can't be arsed to improve any other aspect of your English skills, you really ought to familiarise yourself with the meanings of the words "loose" and "lose". They are not interchangeable. You wrote "loose" although I strongly suspect you meant "lose", but who knows?
Furthermore, what on earth are "eppressions"? I am not being facetious. You have piqued my curiosity and I would really like to know.

But, in my opinion, it's a bloody good clue and when you can't spell where you're from, it's an even better one!
Further, if this isn't yrright, (what with the inflammatory, argumentative and aggressive style) I'll be REALLY surprised!

Heh, ...ah always thought that William Shakespeare chap were a bit stupid. Couldn't even spell his own last name. And, he even invented new words just because he weren't smart enuf to use proper English properly....;)





.

Connedrod, please tell us whether you are yr right or not?

No fibbing, please. Your personal credibility would be at stake.

(Your technical credibility is questionable already.)

Don't want to stick up for anyone here, but I see this as about 1/3 off 12 (about 4), which leaves 8. Not saying that the argument is valid, but I can see his/her logic.
And I reckon yr right about yr right resurrected

Has there been any more talk about this one of late?

I'm hearing again from the traps, fuel, fuel contamination and deep cleaning of the aircraft prior as possibilities.

I've havn't heard anymore about this event, but really havn't stopped thinking about it either from the perspective of an experienced kingair pilot. I keep coming back to the same scenario. A seemingly normal takeoff roll to VR then an overwhelming shock horror event so radical, I don't raise the gear, struggle to fly straight, brace myself for an impending crash and fire off a mayday call. Hard to imagine. A 100kg's of water in the belly bringing the cofg way beyond the aft limit at rotation would probably do it.

But that scenario doesn't explain the horizontal flight path and isn't supported by the vertical flightpath.

Did any witness report oscillations in the aircraft's pitch attitude?

One witness by sheer chance took a photo of the King Air during its take off roll and compared that photo with another KingAir departing on the same runway shortly before the accident. It was obvious the accident aircraft took a significantly longer roll before getting airborne. However this assumes both aircraft took off from the beginning of runway 17.

Do we have a "technical" eye witness that can make that judgement with respect to what was happening about the aircraft axis along that flight path between VR and impact. It was 9 seconds and he was transmitting mayday for at least 5 seconds of that, this tells me he knew he was about to crash.

Where did the 100kgs of water in the belly come from, Xeptu?

A valid question Charlie Ray and one that needs to be explored. Any vessel can take on water under the right set of conditions. A better question is how does it drain out. On the face of it we are presented with enough information that makes it likely to draw a conclusion as to what happened here, but there are elements of it that don't add up.

We appear to have a mindset where he believed for what ever reason I'm going to crash and there's not a thing I can do about it for at least 5 of those 9 seconds.

The key is to find what created that mindset.

I have been told that the aircraft went sideways during the takeoff roll & wiped out some runway lights before getting airborne.

DF.